In the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Murshidabad
Berhampore, Murshidabad.
Case No. C.C/103 /2015
Date of filing: 11/08/2015 Date of Final Order: 11/02/2016
Sunmahommad
S/O-Lt. Hazi Noormohammad.
Vill.- Gokunda, P.O.-Gajdharpara.
P.S.- Berhampore.
Dist- Murshidabad, PIN-742101.……………………………...Complainant
- Vs-
Station Manager,
Berhampore Customer Care Centre,W.B.S.E.D.C.L,
P.O.& P.S.- Berhampore.Dist.- Murshidabad.
PIN-742101. …………….…………………. Opposite Party
Mr. Prashanta Kumar Singha. Ld. Adv. ....………………………….………. for the complainant.
Mr.Siddhartha Sankar Dhar Ld. Advocate…………………………………….for the Opposite Party.
Present: Hon’ble Member, Samaresh Kumar Mitra.
Hon’ble Member, Pranati Ali.
FINAL ORDER
Sri Samaresh KumarMitra,Member.
By filing this complaint u/s 12 of the C. P. Act 1986, the complainantprays for an order directing the OP to reconnect the electric meter in the name of Hazi Noormohammadin which the complainant is the beneficiary immediately and further to pay compensation for harassment and mental agony.
The case of the complainant, in brief, is that he is a consumer under the OP having agriculture connection being Consumer I.D. No. 312066611. He is consuming power for the functioning of Shallow Tubewell to irrigate his land and paying electric bills regularly before the OP. He stated that he was surprised when he received a bill of Rs.18573.03 in the month of May,2015 for the electricity consumed during the period from 29.04.2015 to 01.06.2015. He further assailed that he had a meter bearing No.RGX 16717, but in the bill of the month May,2015 a new meter bearing No.GF723114 has been installed without giving notice to this complainant but he was dark regarding the reading of the previous meter. When he went to the OP for getting information regarding such excessive bill the OP without giving satisfactory answer threatened to disconnect his power connection. The OP negligently took meter reading and send imaginary bill to show huge collection at the cost of the complainant and the OP never provided any meter card as well as never took meter reading in presence of the complainant. The complainant being a small cultivator never consumed so much electric power to irrigate his small piece of land and the OP manufactured fake bills and neglected to render proper service to its consumer. So the complainant filed the instant complaint before this Forum for a direction upon the OP to tender accurate bill commensurate with previous bills, not to disconnect power supply, to replace the meter by an accurate one to prepare bill in accordance with the consumption, to receive all monthly electric bills except the disputed one and a litigation cost of Rs.10,000.00.
The sole OP appeared by its advocate and filed Written Version on 19.01.2016 and denied the allegation as leveled against him. He averred that the disputed meter No.RGX 16717 was replaced by new meter being No.GF 723114 on 12.2.2015 and the bill was raised for the period Feb.25th to 25th March 2015 on average basis i.e.(200units,00units,200units);for the period 25th March to 25th April 2015 (200units,00units,200units). The bill was sent for the consumed units i.e. from12.02.2015 to 01.06.2015. The initial reading on 12.02.215 was 00,00,00 units. The reading on 01.06.2015 was 4612,3251,4023 units. At the time of preparation of the bill for the units consumed the OP adjusted the units which were sent by bill to the petitioner after installation of a new meter. As the disputed bill is not imaginary and baseless so the complainant is liable to pay the bill amount.
The complainant filed a petition u/s 13(3B) of C.P.Act,1986 for interim order on 01.02.2016 which is kept with the record for hearing. That on 08.02.2016 the complainant filed evidence on affidavit and considering the exigency prayed for hearing the complaint petition alongwith petition dated 01.02.2016. The argument as advanced by the advocates of the parties heard in full. The advocate on behalf of the OP by producing a few documents tried to establish that the OP was not deficient in providing service towards the complainant and vehemently objected to the compensation as prayed by the complainant.
From the discussion herein above, we find the following Issues/Points for consideration.
ISSUES/POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
1). Whether the Complainant Sonmahommad is a ‘Consumer’ of the Opposite Party?
2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
3).Whether the O.Ps carried on unfair trade practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?
4).Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?
DECISION WITH REASONS
In the light of discussions here in above we find that the issues/points should be decided based on the above perspectives.
(1).Whether the Complainant Sunmahommad is a ‘Consumer’ of the opposite party?
From the materials on record it is transparent that the Complainant being a beneficiary is a “Consumer” as provided by the spirit of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. As the complainant herein is enjoying electricity supplied by the OP Company and it is admitted by the OP Company being the service provider.
(2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
Both the complainant and opposite party are residents/carrying on business within the district of Murshidabad. The complaint valued within Rs.20,00,000/- limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.
(3).Whether the opposite party carried on Unfair Trade Practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?
The opposite party being the largest Electric Supply Company throughout the state having a lot of offices, power stations, substations and power generating stations decorated with a lot of expert hands and running its business with goodwill for a long period and providing/rendering service for development of society as well as implementing a lot of Govt. programs. So the role of OP Company for the development of the society is unquestionable.
The O.P. herein is the Station Manager of an office of the largest electric supply company throughout the State of W.B. The Company WBSEDCL running its business throughout the state except territorial jurisdiction of Kolkata Corporation. The O.P. Company providing power in the rural areas in different projects for a long period. That is why the consumers in the rural areas are highly grateful to the Company. While providing powers throughout the state it also suffers from many discrepancies. Like not sending/ preparing bills in due time or sending bills for a period when the powers are discontinued and not taking reading regularly as a result the consumers suffers from paying accumulated units at a higher rate. As a consequence the consumers suffer a lot and make their grievances for remedy.
The case of the complainant is that he used to pay bills regularly in accordance with the bills sent by the OP. All on a sudden he received an inflated bill on 20.06.2015 amounting to Rs.18573.03/- meter reading shows 1910units,1060units & 1383units. And due to nonpayment of the bill the OP disconnected the service line of the submersible of the complainant. The complainant being a cultivator could not meet the huge bill at a time but requested the OP to solve the problem so that he can cultivate his land during the Boro Season. But the OP declined to mitigate the problem as cropped up for sending bills of accumulated units. Getting no alternative this complainant filed the instant case for getting reliefs as prayed for in the prayer portion of the complaint. OP by filing w/v denied the allegation as leveled against him but admitted that the disputed bill contains the accumulated units more than 1910units,1060units & 1383units.So the case of the complainant exists.
It appears from the w/v of the OP and perusing the documents as produced the meter reading card of consumer serial no.312066611 reflects the readings in the replaced new meter being No. GF 723114 as on 12.2.2015,000,000&000; on 20.2.2015 (92,87 &103units) ;on 9.3.2015 (1179,1101 & 1311 units); on27.4.2015 (2702units,2191units &2640units); on 01.6.2015 (4612,3251 &4023units); on 06.07.2015 (4775,3254 &4025units); on 03.08.2015 (4803,3254 &4025units); on 03.9.2015 (5534,3315 &4121units); on 2.10.2015 (6131,3319 &4169units); on 20.11.2015 (6783,3344 &4181units); on 15.12.2015 (7310,3350 &4185units). But the electric bill dated 25.4.2015 reflect that current reading date 25.3.2015, next reading date 18.04.2015 to 22.04.2015 bill month, Nov. 2014, consumed units as 200units, 0 units & 200units in the old meter and total charges fixed as Rs.1334.53. The second electric bill dated 8.5.2015 transpire that current reading date 29.04.2015, next reading date 18.5.2015 to 22.05.2015 bill month Dec.2014, consumed units are 200units,0units &200units in the old meter and total charges fixed as Rs.1334.51. The third electric bill dated 20.6.2015 reflected as, current reading date 01.06.2015, next reading date 17.6.2015 to 21.6.2015, bill month Jan.2015, consumed units are 1910,1060 &1383units in the new meter and total charges fixed Rs.18573.03.
Perusing the case record it is crystal clear that the OP failed to prepare bills at per the actual reading of the meter reading card. But reason not known to us why the OP failed to prepare bill at per meter reading card which reflects that total 283 units as on 20.2.2015, total 3592 units as on 9.3.2015, total 7533 units as on 27.4.2015,total 11887 units as on 01.06.2015, total 12054 units as on 06.07.2015, total 12083 units as on 03.08.2015, total 12971 units as on 03.09.2015, total 13620 units as on 02.10.2015, total 14309 units as on 20.11.2015; total 14846 as on 15.12.2015. The bill as produced by the OP dated 25.04.2015 reflects that average consumption is 400 units in total according to old meter reading. If the new meter is installed on 12.2.2015 then why the bill was prepared in accordance with reading of old meter. If it is so then the complainant get sufficient time to meet the bill. The complainant did not face the accumulation units although the OP assailed that in case of STW connection the rate per unit is fixed so the complainant did not suffer any loss for paying accumulation units at a time.
After perusing the case record, electric bills and hearing the argument as advanced by the parties/ agents it appears that OP failed to prepare bills in relation to the meter reading i.e. actual consumption. It is difficult for a cultivator to meet the accumulated units in a bill. The accumulation occurred due to negligence on the part of OP. It is the utmost question that why a consumer suffer at the behest of negligence on the part of OP company.
So, we are in a considered opinion to divide the remaining amount of disputed bill dated 20.06.2015 i.e. 18573.03 by 8 equal divisions with a liberty to pay in each months by the complainant and after getting 1st installment the OP must reconnect the power connection immediately so that irrigation may not hamper. The current bills are to be prepared in accordance with the reading as reflected in the meter card. The OP should take appropriate steps so that the consumer should not meet such a liability to pay bills of huge accumulated units.
The inaction/negligence/ discrepancies of the O.P. Company tantamount to deficiency in service for which the consumers are suffering a lot.
4). Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?
The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the Complainant is able to prove his case. So the Opposite Party is under liability to accept the disputed amount in 8 equal installments i.e. each installments in a month and reconnect the power connection of the complainant immediately after getting 1st installment.
-
Hence it is ordered that the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the Opposite party with a direction to the OP to accept the disputed bill dated 20.6.2015 amounting to Rs.18573.03 in 8 equal divisions each installment in a month and restore power connection in the STW connection of the complainant immediately after getting 1st installment, with a liberty to collect the remaining dues if any in relation to the STW connection in which the complainant is enjoying as a beneficiary.
The payable disputed amount is to be paid by the complainant by 8 equal installments.
The complainant is directed to pay the installments within the first week of the month.
The first installment will be started within 7 days from the date receipt of this order.
The current bills are to be prepared in accordance with the reading as reflected in the meter card. The OP should take appropriate steps so that the consumer should not meet such a liability to pay bills of huge accumulated units.
At the event of failure to comply with the order the Opposite Party shall pay cost @ Rs.50/- for each day’s delay, if caused, on expiry of the aforesaid 30 days by depositing the accrued amount, if any, in the fund of “ Consumer Legal Aid Account”.
Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/sent by ordinary post forthwith, for information & necessary action.
Dictated and corrected by me.
Member Member
District Consumer Disputes District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum. Murshidabad. Redressal Forum. Murshidabad.
